> things like mc++ as an option)and we should stick with the GCJ and > Jilc > things this is just an idea though and any ideas, suggestions, > assistance, > etc., would be welcome and i would be thrilled if i was wrong about > lack of > docs on GCJ but i don't think i am cause the GNU message boards even > admitted to lack of docs on gjc internals.
I am interested in the GCC because it is so well supported. Secondly the lack of documentation is a large problem with the gcc, but people are working on it. One of the motivations for the introspector project was to help document this structure. I must admit that my docs are much worse than anything the gcc team has written. One of the things that I was looking into was a abstract sytax tree level two-way translation between the gcc and other compilers, specifically the cscc compiler. The idea was to use a simple perl scripting language to do the mapping between the two... I have paused this to get into many debates about the legal and moral issues involved, and many people are not happy about the idea..... If you go the GCC-GJC compiler path then I will try and help... mike ===== James Michael DuPont http://introspector.sourceforge.net/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
